Skip to main content

About this Show

Australian Parliament

Series/Special. (2012) Highlights from the Australian Parliament Question Time. Topics include immigration, carbon tax and the Julian Assange case.




San Francisco, CA, USA

Comcast Cable

Channel 91 (627 MHz)






Australia 8, Washington 3, Romney 3, Niru 2, Wrc 1, David Gregory 1, Nbc 1, Neil Barofsky 1, Jule Julia Gillard 1, Julian Assange 1, Drowning 1, Tony Abbott 1, Us 1, Sea 1, Paris 1, America 1, Us At Q& 1, Petrie 1, D.c. 1, Jeffrey Thomas 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  CSPAN    Australian Parliament    Series/Special.  (2012) Highlights from the Australian  
   Parliament Question Time. Topics include immigration, carbon tax...  

    September 24, 2012
    12:00 - 12:20am EDT  

as of yet -- right now there are some differences in some polices around the edges. on the core issue of preserving this very corrupt nuance in washington, neither team offered slough. >> the title of the book is "bailout" and sub title is "bailout: an inside account of how washington abandoned main street while rescuing wall street." our guest has been neil barofsky former inspector general in charge of oversight of t.a.r.p. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> for dvd copy of this program, call 18(777)662-7726 for free transcripts visit us at q&
[captions performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> i ask you pointedly, do you share that vision of america, and what specifically would you do to deal with that 47 percent?
>> the best program is a job. >> do you think half the country sees itself as victims? >> no. i look very positively -- >> so you would part company with governor romney on this point? >> excuse me? >> would you disagree with governor romney on this point? >> i have my own point of view. i think people still bleeb in the american dream. our duty as public servants is to make sure this is a country where everyone has an opportunity to pursue their dreams. the way i look at it, and i will expand on it more in the debate, i suppose. but the point is, if you look at the records, who has created more opportunities? i mention -- i mention welfare reform. those are folks who are down and out. even folks who are disabled want to work. i think that is a natural -- one of the great attributes and
character riftics of all americans. they don't look at themselves as victims. they want a government that reflects their values and gives them the opportunity to reach their aspirations and be a role model for their children. >> governor. >> i don't think the question whether you agree with governor romney's statements, is hard. >> moderated by nbc's david gregory. this debate is courtesy of wrc tv, washington, d.c. watch the entire debate monday at clock p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the british house of commons is in recess. now highlights from the august session of question time in the australia parliament. prime minister jule julia gillard and cabinet members discuss australia's recently imposed carbon tax and the
government's immigration policy concerning asylum seekers. also they outline new anti-smoking efforts. then in their senate, the foreign affairs minister, discusses australia's role in the julian assange case. this is courtesy of australia's public affairs channel. ♪ >> hello. i have highlights of the last sitting australian parliament. one thing that has dogged australia for years is asylum seekers. they have been coming in record numbers on leaky boats, and some, sadly, have been drowning at sea trying to get here. the government has been under i lot of pressure to take a tougher policy to deter boats
from making this journey. finally the government backed down and embraced the opposition's policy, after it was recommended by an expert panel. asylum seekers will now be sent to the tiny pacific company of niru to have their claims processed rather than on shore here in australia. it is what the opposition wanted. opposition leader tony abbott didn't let the government get away without reminding them about the political back flip they have just done. >> any questions from the opposition? >> my question is to the prime minister. i thank the prime minister for financially adopting one element in the border protection policy, namely off-shore in niru. i ask when will she adopt the other parts of our policy? namely, turning back around, and protection visas that are also
necessary if we are finally to stop the boats. >> the prime minister takes the call. >> thank you very much, deputy speaker, and to the leader of the opposition. the government has endorsed in principle the recommendations of this report. a report put together by three australians, a policy effort, by paris aristotle, an expert in refugee and asylum seekers. it is this that has guided the government. i want to take this opportunity to thank those pre-eminent australians for their work. now yesterday we saw people out on the politics saying what the score board was of this report. the truth is of this report, that for every political party in this parliament, including the government, including the opposition, f-6 endorse part of
their policy, aspects reject part of their policy. that is the truth of this record. i say it, frankly, about the things the government has advocated. it is also true about the things the opposition has advocated. now, deputy speaker that is the conclusion of the speaker's work. i think it is incumbent upon us now to put those political score boards and that point making aside, and to put aside the shouting and rhetoric that has characterized this debate and to actually get on with the job of enacting the recommendations of this report. so the government will, later today, introduce amend mingts ments to the legislation already on the government's bill to amend asylum seeker and refugee law.
>> the member has the call. >> my question is to the prime minister. prime minister, why did the government abolish off-shore processing on niru four years ago? >> thank you very much. to the minister who asked the question, the former minister and with a great deal of experience in this policy area, he is aware, as is the government, was elected to the government with a set of policies about off-shore processing and the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers, which he did not agree with. that is a matter of history. >> my question is to the prime minister. i remind the prime minister of her statement that later we would -- labor would end the so-called pacific solution because it is costly,
unsustainable, and wrong as a matter of principle. given that her expert panel disagrees and labor will now restore off-shore processing, will she now apologize for her policy's failure that led to 1,000 deaths at sea, 22,000 illegal arrivals, and a $4.7 billion cost blowout? >> the prime minister has the call. >> thank you very much, deputy. to the deputy leader of the opposition, i have if she is to study this report in detail, and what she will find if she studies this report in detail, it is not saying just redo what was done in the past. it is not saying that. she is consequently belittling the australians that put this together, and i suggest she apologize for that. >> with the asylum leaders seemingly put together, they
returned to their favorite topic, the carbon tocx, which labor recently introduced in australia. the opposition supports it, but wants it scrapped. its effort to attack the prime minister over the policy lead to some rowdy scenes in parliament. >> the prime minister and, i refer her to this letter from australian country choice to indicate that it is now paying a carbon charge of an expert 38% for electricity, an 86% for off-beat electricity. that's an extra $400,000 a week because of the introduction of the carbon tax. why are businesses like this one in opposition to the prime minister's broken promise that there would be no carbon tax? >> the prime minister has the call. >> thank you. to the answer, quite a bit of a
morning this morning. he has not finally gone out and threatened to cut taxes, he has finally come clean on electricity prices. he has said it is true that the carbon tax is not the only factor in the dramatic rise in -- [parliament talking loudly] >> the leader of the opposition has finally connected to the reality that statesmen don't agree with him, the experts don't agree with him, members of his own team don't agree with him, and he has finally come clean that the dramatic increase in power prices are not about power prices, they are about -- >> time. >> my question is to the prime
minister. i refer the prime minister to jeffrey thomas holdings. an operator whose latest electricity bill showed a new item, carbon charges. i stress carbon charges for the month of july alone. $23,000. this new carbon tax cannot be passed on, and there is no compensation. how does this government expect a 60-year-old businessman to survive and the 400 regional jobs preserved? >> the prime minister has the floor. >> thank you very much, deputy speaker, and to the member who raises the question, as the member would be aware, we have always said that carbon pricing, the price would be paid by the big pow looters. there would be a flow-through impact on electricity pricing. the member yelling out he's greeling agreeing with me, i'll say.
we have been clear what that impact would be. there were businesses, whom i'm not required to directly bay pay the carbon price, who are not required to fill in any additional form form, unlike the paperwork version that came here. that they don't pay the carbon price. they don't fill in additional forms. they will see flow-through impacts which is why they put consumers in that position. and they -- >> member has the floor. >> my question is to the prime minister. >> a carbon tax that farmers will not pay a cent. how does she reconcile his statement with this letter from a farmer that shows visible increase in the annual bill on
cardboard boxes used on his family run farm by more than $12,000 due to the carbon tax? >> the prime minister has the call. >> thank you very much. and to the member. he has made a simple point, that it is only big businesses that generate a lot of carbon pollution, thousands and thousands of tons of carbon pollution. indeed, 25,000 tons or more of carbon pollution, that pay the carbon price. that's the point he would have been drawing out in that debate. to the member who is continuing his question, what we are seeing today is opposition determined to continue its fear campaign even though day by day by day the facts are proving this fear campaign wrong.
prices were going -- prices would be unimagineably large. that's wrong. and as i was just about to say, the member who asked the question, funding for school education, that funding has ended. the way in which the index worked, it takes into account, increases like the increase flowing through the 10% increase flowing through for electricity prices. i wonder if the member has asked about the impact of the 70% increase in electricity prices that will hit the -- i wonder if he's ever done that. >> gentleman will leave the chamber under 94-a. they have both previously been warned. the prime minister and its member from north sidney with a
double hit. not my fault if you can't hear me because you are making so much noise. >> and the minister has just committed an -- he will remove himself from the chamber under 94 94-a. persistent interest jex will not be tolerated. >> the leader of the opposition should withdraw the interest jexes he persistently makes across the chamber along the lines you have insisted they be withdrawn. >> the leader of the opposition will withdraw. >> i withdraw. >> the leader of the opposition will remove himself from the chamber under 94-a, and to continually ignore -- the member -- the leader of the opposition has now been advised by the
chair that i asked you as as you approached to do it without qualification. you could not help yourself. the leader of the opposition will leave the chamber under 94-a. the member from whitesfield has the call. >> the other big news was the victory in the high court that forces tobacco companies to sell cigarettes in plain packets. this is a world first. something tobacco giants have fought years against. the victory was a big one for the government in their anti-smoking crusade. >> the member has the call. >> thank you, deputy speaker. deputy speaker, my question is to the minister for health. will the minister explain what today's high court decision means to public health and in particular, what it means for young australians. >> here, here! >> the member for petrie.
e has her the call. >> today's victory will many help countless australian minds. few australians take up this deadly habit. every year, smoking kills around 15,000 australians. it accounts for about 10.5% of deaths in this country. that's more than 10 times the number of people that die on our roads last year. and it is about 30 times more people than the tobacco industry employs in australia. because of today's decision, cigarette packages will no longer be able to go with branding that looks cool, sophisticated, macho, or feminine. instead, this is what cigarette packs will look like, manufactured from the first of october. because of today's petition, ga